#jesus christ as like. basically blasphemous to him. very interesting indeed.

[butchjess]

a canticle for leibowitz a book that is like a vaccine in getting you to forgive fictional christians for being annoying. i love you religion prevailing after the world ends and then starts again i love you the cyclical nature of man and empires and nations

[crustacean-on-main]

Libertarianism and Territoriality

A while ago, I got involved in a kerfluffle with esteemed tumblr user @shieldfoss in which I unwisely threatened to longpoast at him about politics. Turns out, there is demand for this post (hello @samueldays), so now I actually have to write it. Ugh.

content warning: the following poast is ramblomatic

So, to get the preliminaries out of the way -- tumblr is an extremely unsearchable website, and this isn’t meant to be a character assassination, so it’s both entirely possible and disturbingly probable that the things I will be arguing against correspond poorly or, in the worst case, not at all to things shieldfoss actually believes. Therefore, I will be arguing against a cloud of beliefs that I feel to be common enough among self-described libertarians and hope thereby to make perhaps a more general point.

At the heart of this discussion is the question of whether believing territoriality is immoral is incompatible with other ideals of libertarianism. We’re already running into the problem of extremely ill-defined terms, so we’ll have to clarify here. Territoriality is the easier one; we’ll specify that we mean a belief in the right of a group of people to eject or exclude others from territory that they hold in common or over which they have power. “Libertarianism” is the thornier one, so it might take longer to get at the essence here. For the discussion of borders, the common beliefs that are more or less relevant are a belief in the primacy of property rights, a belief in contractualism, being favorable to freedom of association and being deeply suspicious of government in general, but especially where government regulation could interfere with any of the former three. Now, let us look at a small-scale hypothetical example to illustrate the issue under discussion. Imagine a village in rural Pennsylzhopiya, populated largely by very devout members of some sect -- call them the Ruritanians -- who believe very fervently in Jesus Christ and Not Smoking Tobacco. One day they are surprised to learn that the United States has been taken over by the Libertarian Revolution and will henceforth be governed as a minarchy. Mindful of their new powers, they immediately pool all their property in a new entity called the Ruritanian Corporation of Pennsylzhopiya, that has a charter which prevents it from selling any of its property outright, and gives the religious community of Ruritanians deciding power in what it can do with its land. Meanwhile, in Philomena, the capital city of Pennsylzhopiya, imagine a neighborhood of people whose politics can be summed up as “progressive, but skeptical of big government”. Delighted at the news of the revolution, they do nothing in particular, because they already own their houses. They expect their lives to improve as a consequence of decreased regulation. Inspired by the political upheaval, some outsiders move to the Ruritanian community. They cannot buy Ruritanian land, but they can lease it at a low price provided they swear not to blaspheme Jesus Christ or Smoke Tobacco. Some of them fail to uphold this code; the Ruritanian council votes to end their leases and eject them from Ruritanian property. Others convert, using funds they have saved up to buy further land and add it to the common possession of the Ruritanian community. Ruritanians benefit from the light of the Libertarian Revolution. Meanwhile, in the libertarian neighborhood, a more unpleasant sort of radical fundamentalist Ruritanians has bought a house after the previous owner moved away. They have taken up picketing in public squares around the neighborhood, condemning public tobacco smoking. Since they by and large aren’t doing anything illegal, and the owner of the public squares, the city council, remains bound to the U.S. constitution, which was reaffirmed after the Libertarian Revolution, their neighbors are in a bit of a pickle. They did not take advantage of the new legal regime to create an entity exercising power in their name, if only because they don’t trust each other enough to give up private ownership of their homes, so they can’t do anything about the picketers. As time passes, more Ruritanian fundamentalists move to Philomena, eventually creating a sufficiently large nuisance for their liberal neighbors that most of them move away, creating a newly fundamentalist Ruritanian neighborhood that can in turn use its power to create new corporations to make sure the neighborhood stays Ruritanian. I assume most of my readers know where this is going, so let’s consider the final case: what if the Ruritanians didn’t form such a corporation but left their lands privately owned? They’d be vulnerable to the exact same tactic, since once property is legitimately acquired, there is no way to dislodge its owner. The real, non-libertarian United States contains many examples of this kind of hostile takeover of neighborhoods between groups, largely accomplished by application of force that was either within the bounds of the law or not cracked down on by whatever higher authority should have. The upshot of all this is that if you truly care about freedom of association with all it entails -- essentially, the right to choose your neighbors -- then you are left with the uncomfortable reality that if you have no sovereignty over the territory you occupy, you can’t choose shit; this is, of course, not a problem with a hypothetical libertarian society only, as history attests. Libertarians for their part tend to answer this criticism in one of several ways. The first is basically “well if you have a problem you can leave”, or the exit-only approach. This is in my opinion not workable on a large scale outside of the US, and probably not even there, but is at least philosophically consistent. The second is giving up this freedom as a value, at which point you just collapse into progressivism with a procedural fetish. The most interesting answer is a variation on “would your neighbors sell to people whose values are so different from theirs?”. I think that the answer tends to be: yes, they would. Unless there is a powerful compulsion on every single one of those neighbors not to sell to certain people, they have no incentive to forgo their personal material gain or convenience for the benefit of their neighbors, especially if, say, they were moving away anyway. You also cannot really create such a compulsion in a libertarian society unless it already exists, since you’d have to surrender your very real privileges, your absolute property rights, to the community in order to benefit from collective organisation this way, and that is extremely unlikely to happen unless you are already a fundamentalist Ruritanian. Conceivably an intentional community of some kind could pull it off, but that’s basically answer one in material terms. The tl;dr here is that in my experience a lot of libertarians claim to care about the benefits of social cohesion, or at the very least presuppose that you already have it, but don’t give a lot of thought to how it might be obtained or preserved once you have it. It’s true that a libertarian state could actually help buttress it if your group already has fanatical levels of asabiyyah, by expanding the things you’re allowed to do with yourself contractually, but for most people that doesn’t apply. Indeed, we see that even in our non-libertarian versions of capitalism, the combination of market forces and upward concentration of force is extremely corrosive to this sort of group cohesion. The final consequence of this is that a libertarian society (again, defined as above) would be extremely vulnerable to collapsing into what we have now, if not worse -- there is neither incentive nor means for anyone to defend against concentration of power into the moneyed few who control the largest international corporations. I’ve limited myself in the examples to discussion of small-scale examples, but it’s trivial to see what happens if you extend the same principles to national borders. If nations all had open borders, no tariffs and homogenized legal systems recognizing the primacy of property rights, you would get the worst kind of cyberpunk dystopia, where the biggest capital interests could essentially do whatever the fuck they wanted. I think many libertarians were attracted to the ideology by the depredations of large organizations like this, and probably believe in the romanticized freedom of the smallholder more than the freedom of international capital, which is why I originally called this position incoherent. The ideal of individual freedom is a foil, something to distract from the fact that if you remove all intermediaries, you’re left with the leviathan on top and individuals immediately subject to it.

[dailyaudiobible]

06/09/2021 DAB Transcript

1 Kings 5:1-6:38, Acts 7:1-29, Psalms 127:1-5, Proverbs 16:28-30

Today is the 9th day of June welcome to the Daily Audio Bible I’m Brian it is great to be here with you in the center of our week. And this is the first full week of the month of June, not that that matters but we’re in the middle of the first full week. I pay attention to these things because it's day by day step-by-step. And, so, everything that marks the time, the forward progress is a good thing. And it's good to be here with you did today around the Global Campfire as we take this next step forward. In the Old Testament we are reading from the book of First Kings and we’re just getting going. We’re…we’re working through the life and reign of King Solomon who is the son of King David. Solomon is leading Israel really to its finest hour. And that's basically what we’re watching. It's really interesting, because in Solomon's reign, everything that we have been working toward this entire year reaches it’s…it…it's mountaintop…it…it's apex. And then in Solomon's reign there's a slide. Like, we reach the mountaintop and then we start going down the other side. But right now, we are working our way to that apex. Solomon has consolidated all his power. He's got his government structure in place. His wisdom is becoming renowned all over the world. People are actually making Jerusalem a destination. Like, high profile powerful people are making Jerusalem a destination because they want to visit with this wise  King Solomon. And Solomon is going to build a permanent temple for God, something that his father David had wanted to do but wasn't allowed to do. Solomon will be allowed to do that. And, so, let's head in that direction. First Kings chapters 5 and 6 today.

Commentary:

Okay. So, in first Kings Solomon is now indeed building the temple. And we see how they’re gonna get the lumber and how it’s gonna be floated down the ocean and the exchange of payments and all of this. And, so, the temple, the temple of God is being built in Jerusalem, bringing with it a sense of national identity and spiritual identity. And we’ll continue with that story tomorrow.

In the book of Acts, we sort of began a story yesterday, just very very briefly and that story has spilled over into today's reading in the form of a testimony. So, we remember that there were seven deacons that were appointed to more fairly distribute resources and food to…to widows. One of those men was named Stephen. Stephen was out doing his job but he was confronted by Jewish people from other regions and it kinda broke out into a fight. And then there were some accusations about Stephen's commitment to his Jewishness and to his Jewish heritage. He is being associated with Jesus and one of the things about Jesus, one of the accusations against Jesus was that…well…first of all that he was a blasphemer but second of all that he was a lawbreaker, right? The…the…the laws of Moses were being broken or reinterpreted in a way that they didn't accept. So, Stephen's being accused and then he's arrested. And, so, now what's happening is Stephen is giving his testimony in his own defense. And what we should notice is that what Stephen is saying is basically a review of the story that we've read from the beginning of the year. He's retracing the steps by retelling the origin story of the Hebrew people and by doing this he’s proving not only that he knows the story but that this is his own heritage. There's some very very important things going on here. People who were following the Nazarene or “the way”, the way of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus indeed was crucified, and everybody knows that. There are still people following his teachings, though that truly did believe He was a good teacher and a good man and a prophet of God, and there are people who are following after the ways of Jesus, but at this point, at the origin, the beginning, the flashpoint of the church, this is very, very centered in the Hebrew culture. So, the Nazarenes teachings can theoretically be tolerated as long as they stay in the context of Judaism. And the earliest believers were Jews. Jesus was a Jew. Everyone who penned anything in the New Testament was also a Jew. And, I mean, there are generally scholarly disputes that have always been going on about authorship of certain books. And we can…we can point like to the book of Hebrews and go like, “well…you don't know that. You can't make that statement because we don't know who the author of the book of Hebrews.” But, like the book of Hebrews is to Hebrews. So, it would be really hard for it to not have been written by a Jew because the whole context at all in that book is a Hebrew context. So, Stephen's arrested and he's being questioned and he’s…he’s choosing to show his Jewishness because as the church began it was coming from that context from that region from those people and outward into the world. And, so, you can follow this Rabbi Jesus, you can…can follow this person’s teachings as long as you obey the Mosaic law and follow the customs of Judaism. Jesus was accused. Stephen is being accused of not doing that. This will eventually come to a head. And we’ll get there soon enough, but it's important to just realize it is a Hebrew context from which this story springs. We are mostly all Gentile people who believe in Jesus in the world today. Like vastly more Gentile than Jewish, and yet we can't approach the good news without the Hebrew context, or it doesn't make any sense. So with Stephen being arrested we see some early rumblings, some of the early unsettling reverberations of what is to come as this new thing that God is doing upon the earth through Jesus Christ begins to take hold, begins…well…begins to form and become a tsunami that spreads throughout all of the earth. We also have a really good opportunity, and I point this out every year when we get to the story of Stephen, we have a really good opportunity because his testimony is…is review of the stories that we have read. So, it gives us an opportunity to quickly go back and kind of catch-up to where we are. At the end of this…and I’ll bet most of you already know, at the end of this we’ll meet somebody who is around all this testimony and all that's going on around Stephen. He is a zealous Pharisee, very devoutly attempting to become righteous before God by obeying the law and doing what he believes God is commanding and also defending God. He is a student of Gamaliel, and his name is Saul and he will eventually know…be known as the apostle Paul. But when we meet him, and we meet him in this story he wants nothing to do with Jesus. Actually, that's not true. He does want something to do with Jesus. His mission is to blot out the name and memory of Jesus from the earth and from God's people, the Jewish people. And, so, he wants to round up these followers of the Nazarene these people that, maybe they’re being tolerated by the greater community, but for Saul these are…these are heretics. These are people that are on the outer boundaries. They need to be rounded up and punished and silenced and this teaching of this person, Jesus, needs to go away. And, so, we’ll see that develop in the coming days.

And then lastly, let's just look at the proverb again. It’s three sentences. Sentence number one: Destructive people produce conflict. So, I mean that's ½ a sentence. That’s ½ a sentence but if we stop at that half a sentence and just go, “okay. When I am observing conflict in the world, the voice of wisdom instructs there is…there’s destructive people involved identifying that…just the knowledge of it is helpful but then the sentence is completed. So, “destructive people produce conflict. Gossip’s alienate close friends.” That last one is something that we probably already know, and it's very destructive and causes conflict, right? So, gossip in this sentence is very dangerous. It causes destruction and conflict and alienates close friends. I mean, we can just take that one. In fact, let's just take that one. If you want to go back and read the other two sentences, that's Proverbs 16:28 through 30 today. Let’s just stay there. The things that we say, truly have power and truly need to be selected carefully.

Prayer:

Father, that is something we also know. We know this. It's just hard to practice it, to do it consistently because how we respond to just about anything very much is affected by the emotional state that we’re in, what's going on within us. And, so, how we respond to something usually is because of what button got pressed within us and that button is attached to all kinds of stuff inside of our psyches. And, so, we’re not always seek wisdom in the moment. And yet we can cultivate that, we can build that into our lives so that we think before we speak, before we gossip, before we alienate close friends, before we produce conflict, before we’re a destructive person. Come Holy Spirit into that we pray. In the name of Jesus, we ask. Amen.

Announcements:

dailyaudiobible.com is home base, it’s…it’s the website, it’s where you find out what's going on around here. So, check it out.

Check out the Daily Audio Bible shop there are resources there that I say often are there to accompany the journey. That's why they're there. So, like resources like The God of Your Story, which is a project that we created. It was a an incredibly difficult long journey, but to create a 365 day devotional accompanying the passages that we read every day. So, it's kind like the gold of the Daily Audio Bible in written form. And, so, it's a resource that’s amazingly available even when Internet isn’t there, whether you're traveling or on vacation or whatever to just keep with your rhythm. It also serves as a fantastic accompaniment. You know, maybe Daily Audio Bible in the morning then maybe God of Your Story just to kind of reinforce or to look at what we read today and what you might've been meditating on during the day from a different angle just to get that in our hearts, in our spirits, allowing it to really transform who we are. So, yeah, check that out, The God of Your story. It's available…well…it’s available anywhere that you can get a book, but it is certainly available in the Daily Audio Bible Shop. So, check that out.

If you want to partner with the Daily Audio Bible, you can do that at dailyaudiobible.com. There is a link on the homepage, and I thank you, I thank you. We wouldn't be here. We couldn’t do this if we didn't do it together. And, so, thank you profoundly and humbly for your partnership.

If you’re using the app, you can press the Give button in the upper right-hand corner or the mailing address, if you prefer, is PO Box 1996 Spring Hill Tennessee 37174.

And, as always, if you have a prayer request or encouragement, you can hit the Hotline button in the app, which is the little red button up at the top or you can dial 877-942-4253.

And that's it for today. I’m Brian I love you and I'll be waiting for you here tomorrow.

Community Prayer and Praise:

Hey this is Matt from Eastern Washington I was just calling in again really quick just for prayer or encouragement for Becky in Texas. I was listening to the February 22nd podcast for Daily Audio Bible and you were talking about a blended family and just being exhausted and tired and, you know, your husband's a first responder. You know, so I don't know what's kind of struggles you guys are going through but, you know, my wife and I are both first responders. We both work law enforcement. You know, I don't know if your husband works law enforcement or EMS or as a firefighter but any…any one of those professions, you know, it…it takes a toll on people. So, anyways, Father god, You know I…I just want to lift Becky up to You and…and her family up to You and just pray that that You can help her, and that You can help them find some sort of where for healing in their marriage and to just restore Becky's strength and…and that You can show her that having faith in You and…and seeking You for that strength can help get her through all this when she doesn't think that she has anything left. Father God I…I just pray that You can help Becky's husband, You know, see that she is exhausted and soften his heart and allow him to help her through these struggles and to reach out to help when he's struggling. In Jesus’ name. Amen. Becky just look for God for that strength that's all I've been able to do with my stuff. Bye.

Good morning DABC this is Vicki from Ohio I'm reaching out to Vincent from Connecticut this morning. His message really touched my heart. There are so many of us out here that are struggling to find our mate. We go through it so slow. The process is so slow, and healing takes time. I too cannot find a partner that wants to be with me. I always get excited at the beginning and get lots of promises and then I am left behind. God watches over us. He does heal us. It takes so long though sometimes. Vincent, I pray that you keep praying and asking God and that He will provide a woman for you that is deserving and loves you as you can love her. I pray this for everyone out there searching and hoping and desiring their ultimate soulmate through Christ. I pray for myself. I pray for Vincent, and I pray for each one of you out there looking. In Jesus’ name I pray. Be true to us dear Father and let Your will be done. Amen.

Hey family it's Sparky from Texas. I wanted to take a minute to pray for Andrew who called in asking for prayer over… He’s 21 years old and I just wanted to take a minute to…to tell you that I remember being 21 years old and in the bowel of sin. I’m 35 now but the feelings that you're feeling, it's a pivotal moment in your life and you are in the right spot, and I wish that I would have been 21 years old listening to the Daily Audio Bible and listening to…listening to people pray for each other. You've got the world ahead of you. Keep your head in the word and look to God. And when it feels like there's way too much sin in your life, we've just finished watching the perfect person and we've just finished watching the people closest to Him sin, including Peter. You're in the right spot. Focus your life where you need to be, where you want to point and keep that part of your life pointed towards Jesus. Keep it here in prayer with people. I just wanted to give you encouragement. I pray with all of you. I love you. And you bring me to tears sometimes, but every prayer request I pray with every one of you. I hope you all have a blessed add weekend and a blessed week following up.

Today is June 4th this is Beth from Chicago. Today's reading really touched my heart. I ask that you pray for my sons Tyler, Ryan, and Logan, that their heart may be opened and remove the hardening that has occurred through childhood, through rough times. And I ask that Lord God our Father come into their lives and touch them and help them believe. I am very thankful for this community, and I love you all and I wish you all blessings, peace, and joy. Thank you so much. This is such a beautiful start too every morning. God bless you. Amen.

Hi, my name is Angie from Colorado Springs calling. It's my second time calling. Thank you guys for praying for me last month or maybe it was April. I'm still needing of prayer for confidence and clarity, depression, anxiety and happiness and laughter. I've been sober two years and in this time I have changed so much for the better and have a lot of goals set but in the meantime my son has pretty much not accepted me anymore as his mom. And I got into addiction when he was 18. Before that we were close as ever. He's now 28 and we've been very close throughout this whole time of my life, but I just didn't do the things I needed to do for him as a mom. So, he has a new mom in his late age which I’m grateful for because their Christians, they love him as far as I know. Anyways, I'm heartbroken. I'm…I'm…just heartbroken. So, he's always been so close to me, and such a good son, and I've been a good mom believe it or not even through my hard times of addiction. Anyways, I just…I can't find any pleasure in life anymore and it's because I'm feeling like it's a death losing a son that you love…

[rjhamster]

The Berean - Galatians 4:1-3

(1) Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, (2) but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father. (3) Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world. New King James Version   Change your email Bible version

Paul uses an analogy that is similar to Galatians 3:23-25, where he likens the Old Covenant to a tutor meant to teach, but his application is very different. He says, "Now I say," indicating a different approach to his instruction. As long as an heir is a child, as long as he is immature and unable to inherit, he is not much different from a servant. The child's potential is much greater, and his future is much brighter, but in day-to-day actvities, he is restricted, limited, and controlled just as much as a servant of no lineage. The net effect of the immaturity is the loss of control. The child, like the servant, can only respond to what happens to him rather than having any power over his well-being or destiny.

Galatians 4:2 shows that the immature child is ruled over by others until the father, the one who gives the inheritance, decides that the heir can be freed from the grasp of the tutors and governors. This does not mean that at the "appointed time" the heir actually inherits from the father, but rather that at the appointed time he is no longer under the control of somebody else.

In this analogy, Paul does not say that the "tutors" and "governors" are positive elements, or that they are good for the child. He only says that they restrict the child and make him little better than a servant. Verse 3 likens the "tutelage" and "governance" to bondage, not like the schoolmaster of Galatians 3:24-25, which was meant to train and prepare.

In this series of verses, Paul is showing that until God the Father decides to drag someone out of this world (John 6:44), even though it has been preordained that they have a chance to "be a lord" and to inherit eternal life and other promises from the Father, they are powerless against the "elements of the world"—the rudiments of the cosmos, the world apart from God. These elements are demonic in nature. Before God called the Gentile Galatians, they were in bondage to sin and to Satan. Even though they had a higher potential—to inherit the Kingdom of God at the resurrection—until the appointed time when God saw fit to remove the shackles, they were just as controlled and powerless as the average servant of Satan.

Similar imagery is found in Colossians 2:20-22, where Paul was arguing against Gnosticism and asceticism:

Therefore, if you died with Christ from the basic principles [rudiments, KJV] of the world, why, as though living in the world, do you subject yourselves to regulations—"Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle," which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men?

Paul is clearly not referring to a commandment of God, as verse Colossians 2:22 shows. He is referring to false, pagan teachings that are considered to be the "basic principles" or "rudiments" of the cosmos.

This is also shown in Ephesians 2:1-3:

And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

Before God redeems a man and "quickens" him—makes him alive—he walks according to the course of the cosmos. This passage shows clearly that the cosmos is ruled by the "prince of the power of the air," Satan the Devil. His spirit works in the children of disobedience, and they serve him. They are powerless in his grasp until God pays for them with the blood of His Son.

The "elements of the world" in Galatians 4:3 cannot be a reference to the Mosaic law, because the Gentile Galatians were never exposed to it until after their conversion—after God had ordained that they be taken out of the control of the "governors of this world" (Ephesians 6:12). The "elements of the world" are those basic things that make this cosmos what it is—a world apart from God. These elements are sinful, rebellious, and pagan.

It is blasphemous to say that anything that God ordained as a way to live (e.g., the Old Covenant) would put a man in bondage, when God's every intent is to free mankind from the bondage of Satan, sin, and human nature (Exodus 6:6; 20:2; Deuteronomy 5:6; 13:5,10; John 8:33-36; Romans 8:15). Would God liberate the Israelites from the bondage of Egypt (Exodus 1:14; 2:23; 6:5; Deuteronomy 6:12; 8:14; 26:6; Acts 7:6-7) only to shackle them again? On the contrary, He had their best interests in mind, providing for them a "schoolmaster"—the Old Covenant—which would be in effect until the Messiah came. Those who declare that the law of God brings one into bondage are pronouncing that they are anti-Christ: "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be" (Romans 8:7).

God's law is not a burden. It is a definition of right and wrong and an extension of God's own character. It is the way that He lives, and there is no Being in the universe that has more freedom than God! James refers to the law of God as the "perfect law of liberty" (James 1:25), not the "law of bondage." He also calls it the "royal law" (James 2:8), not the "weak and beggarly law." Further, the apostle John was inspired to write in I John 5:3 that "this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments: and His commandments are not grievous [burdensome]." It is the height of carnality and blasphemy to consider God's perfect, royal law of liberty to be a weak and beggarly element that keeps mankind in bondage.

Some have tried to use Galatians 4:3-5, 9-11 to argue that God's law in general, and the Sabbath in particular, has been "done away with." They twist these scriptures to try to say that God's law kept us in bondage, but now Jesus Christ has redeemed us from the law so we no longer need to keep the Sabbath(s) holy. This is ironic, because one of the fundamental meanings and symbols of the Sabbath is redemption and liberation—not from any moral law, but from slavery and bondage to Egypt (sin):

Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee. Six days thou shalt labour, and do all thy work ... And remember that thou [were] a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out [redeemed, rescued, freed]thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day (Deuteronomy 5:12-13,15).

God had to instruct the Israelites about the Sabbath again because they had been in Egypt for centuries and had forgotten the instructions to their fathers. The Sabbath was reintroduced right after they were brought out of Egypt (Exodus 16), long before God made a covenant with Israel (Exodus 20). So, while the Sabbath command was a requirement included in the Old Covenant, its validity, importance, and necessity by no means ended when the Old Covenant became obsolete.

— David C. Grabbe